yotik wrote:Yeah i find what you said a little biased. Respectively, ive been on both sides of the scale as far as income/social status. Ive been on minority assistance and ive had times where ive generated over 5k in income in a month. I think a major problem in this country is greed, capitalism and our definition of wealth (not that these are entirely wrong). But if I had a Billion dollars, I would feel more accomplishment investing in my Nation than saving every dollar and finding tax breaks. The concept confuses me that people can have such rants when it was others wealth that led them to their success. Someone invested in you why not invest in others? Isnt that our basic governing pricipal? "For the people by the people amirite?" Why do we find it so difficult to lift each other up? I dont remember "for me only, by the people"...
I respect how you feel, and how you choose to feel a sense of accomplishment is your choice/right. So let me ask you this, why did you choose to say "if I had a Billion dollars" as stipulation for investing in the nation? Surely at over 5k/month income, your federal withholding was substantial enough to generate that feeling of accomplishment. Yes that's sarcasm, but I do that to make a point. You are in essence saying, that because YOU would feel a sense of accomplishment for not taking any tax breaks if you were a billionaire, you feel the government should step in (on your behalf, having not asked the billionaire how he/she feels about it), and force higher taxes upon that individual so that they may also feel this sense of accomplishment. Am I right? You're okay with tax breaks for lower-income families/individuals, but not for the very-wealthy? Do you feel those who have obtained great wealth should be penalized for the betterment of those who do not have as much (yet had the same opportunities to do so)?
Have you ever paid for a friends meal because he was tight on money? Most of us have... no big deal right? Now go to Walmart and invite everyone there who makes less than you, to a nice restaurant you might go to when you were making 5k/month, and pay for their meals. Then do it everyday, or expect large fines with the possibility of jail time. What? Not fair? But they should be able to live like you do. It's not their fault they can't afford to eat out everyday, and instead get their meals out of a box. If they can't live like you, then the government needs to step in and make sure you're spreading your wealth (and yes, at 5k/month you were making much more than the "average middle income"... so there were many "under" you).
Sorry, but to quote our own government on the definition of Democracy...
USINFO.STATE.GOV wrote:Democracies rest upon the principle that government exists to serve the people. In other words, the people are citizens of the democratic state, not its subjects. Because the state protects the rights of its citizens, they, in turn, give the state their loyalty. Under an authoritarian system, by contrast, the state demands loyalty and service from its people without any reciprocal obligation to secure their consent for its actions. -
http://usinfo.state.gov/produc...s.htm
So the government exists to serve the people. It's not a business entity created to provide goods and services for "unfortunates". If it was a business entity for that purpose, it would certainly be a non-profit, and it would certainly have to obtain funds through donation or other business outlets. It could not come to your door to demand your "donation (amount varies based on income level)" every month, that would be illegal. If someone chooses a path in life that brings them hardship, don't force me to pay for it. I may not want to. Personally, I donate every month to an organization (Metropolitan Ministries) that helps break the cycle of poverty by helping only those who choose to help themselves. They do the typical meals for the homeless, but they also provide temporary housing to those who need (and want) help getting back into a self-sustaining livelihood.
By the way, what is "minority assistance"? Is that some kind of additional government financial assistance extended out only to minorities? Do you mean that if I'm ever unexpectedly out of work and require a short-term assistance from the government (like unemployment), I wouldn't be eligible for it due to the fact I'm not a minority (even if my $0 income is the same as the minority's $0 income)? I sure hope our new president steps up and gets rid of racist, one-sided programs like that. It's just not fair.
In complete seriousness, we all have the same rights, abilities, and opportunities after all.
